Just Jennifer

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

I am not remotely a fan of Donald Trump. I went in to the Presidential election expecting, as much as I hated the idea, that Hillary Clinton would be elected. I didn't vote for either, choosing to writing in Bernie Sanders, who I knew would not win, but who I found less objectionable than either of the two clowns running at the top. Early on during the returns, I was mildly surprised to see Trump take an early lead. I figured it was just a fluke. Then as the night went on, it was obvious that something very odd was happening. Finally, it became clear that Trump would likely win. As I had figured, I would be unhappy no matter what happened, and I was right. The next morning, he was the winner.I wasn't quite sure what to expect from a Trump presidency. I figured he would overturn some of the things Obama had done. Some of Obama's changes I approved of, some I thought were absurd. Especially his extremist views on transgender issues.

One of the worst of those decisions was his allowing openly transgender personnel to serve in the military. The military is not a place for social experimentation. Its primary purpose is to provide for the defense of our nation. It requires disciplined, functional troops, who are ready to stand firm against all enemies of our nation. They need to be able to work together and form bonds that allow them to operate as a well prepared unit.Allowing males to enlist as women, and be in women's barracks, where there is inevitable nudity, or likewise to allow females to serve in men's unit is not acceptable. It is simply not fair to those subjected to such an intrusion. For someone who is actually transsexual, such a situation is unthinkable. But we are not talking about transsexuals here. We are talking about men, who enjoy living as women, but who wish to retain a strong connection to being a man. They may in some cases, even choose to go so far as to have SRS, but they still want people to know they were born male. Or, they are females who want to live as men, but have everyone know they were born female.It would have been one thing if Obama has instituted a policy similar to "don't ask, don't tell," where transgender personnel would have been allowed to serve, but would be required to not engage in certain behaviors on duty, on base, and such. But instead, they were allowed to serve as their "target" gender, as indicated in this rather extreme policy statement:

Policy Highlights

Service members with a diagnosis from a military medical provider indicating that gender
transition is medically necessary will be provided medical care and treatment for the
diagnosed medical condition, in the same manner as other medical care and treatment.

Gender transition in the military begins when a Service member receives a diagnosis
from a military medical provider indicating that gender transition is medically necessary,
and concludes when the Service member’s gender marker is changed in the Defense
Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) and the Service member serves and is
recognized in the preferred gender.

At that point, the Service member is responsible for meeting all applicable military
standards in the preferred gender and will use berthing, bathroom, and shower facilities
associated with their gender.

Any discrimination against a Service member based on their gender identity is sex
discrimination and may be addressed through the Department’s equal opportunity
channels.

In the past, I suggested that transsexuals who had undergone diagnosis, and SRS could be allowed to serve as long as they were not open about their past history. But that is nowhere near what this policy provide for. It should also be noted that among people who identify as transgender, they do not generally have a medical condition as such. They are seeking a lifestyle change, not an actual medical transition. Unfortunately, far too many therapists are quick to grant them a claim to being transsexual, even when it clear that they are not, because of political pressure from activists who seek to use transsexuals to further their own demands.Trump has, during his time in office, exhibited bizarre behavior, a general lack of understanding of history, and the role of the president, and an appalling lack of ethics, but in regards to this issue, he is doing the right thing.

Monday, June 12, 2017

I've been thinking about this post for quite some time. It is about something that is quite obvious, but which is kind of easy to overlook in all the rhetoric that spews out of the "transgender movement." But, an article at LGBT Weekly by Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, one of the leading voices of that movement finally pushed me to write it.In the article, titled "Fourteen years ago and now," Mr. Sandeen says

"I remember coming out in early 2003 as a transsexual – that’s what we called ourselves back then. When those of us who called ourselves transsexual also called ourselves transgender, it was actually kind of political – we were also identifying ourselves as falling under a transgender umbrella of gender nonconforming people."

This quote pretty much sums up what the transgender movement is really all about. First off, it is not about being "transsexual." Mr. Sandeen may have called himself a "transsexual," but he is not, and never was remotely a transsexual. He may have even been able to find some doctor who is willing to rubber stamp his fantasies, but he has been a life long member of the "They Will Take My Penis When They Pry it From My Cold Dead Fingers" club. He occasionally flirts with the idea of SRS, but has made no real move in that direction. Even during the period when the VA was supposedly going to cover it. He has had an orchidectomy, rendering him an eunuch, and has tried to pass this off as sex reassignment surgery, but he still retains his penis.

Next he states that he also called himself "transgender" he connects that with being "gender non-conforming." This is where the truth really begins to come out. First off, being transsexual is NOT remotely about being "gender non-conforming." It is quite the opposite. It is about being fully the gender, and sex, that you really are. Here Mr. Sandeen is letting the secret out. Transgender is really all a scam.The transgender movement has tried, for some time, to use transsexualism as, in effect, their "beard." That is, they have claimed to be "transsexual" to justify their demands. But they are not transsexual, and in fact, have no desire to be anything other than what they were born as. They only want to be "gender non-conforming." In order to be that, they must remain their birth gender. They may claim to "really" be a gender different from what they were assigned at birth, but this is simply not the case.Take Mr. Sandeen, for example. He served about 20 years in the United States Navy. If his "true" gender had been female, he would have probably not made it through one tour of duty. He would have not been able to fit in to the male culture that military service requires of men. He would not have been able to tolerate being forced to dress and shower with other men. I remember how much I dreaded changing during high school PE. I went out of my way to avoid showering when others were present during the one semester I lived in a dorm with communal showers. The rest of the time, I lived in what was either a dorm with "suites" where you had the bathroom to yourself, or in a dorm that was originally a women's dorm, where the showers had individual stalls.All of this brings us to the big secret. Transgender people, for the most part, do not really want to be what they claim. They want to retain their birth gender, and more often than not, their birth sex. In many cases, when they do change their sex, they seem to regret, and they go out of their way to make sure that others know their birth sex. For them, it is not about actually being "their true gender and proper sex," but is about forcing people to "accept" them as something they work very hard to not actually be. People who identify a transgender seem to have this compulsion to force people to both see them as their birth sex and gender, but treat them as the opposite. They want to invade spaces where they really don't belong, and increasingly, to expose their bodies while demanding people pretend that their genitals are something that they are not.Transsexuals are disgusted by the idea of having someone see them naked before their surgery. I remember having to endure being examined by the surgeons who performed my SRS. It was excruciating. But when I went in for a follow-up, and had a rather handsome young doctor removing stitches, his face right up in my privates, I suddenly realized that it did not bother me at all.SRS does make a world of different for those who actually need it. For those who don't. it just makes them rather miserable.

Thursday, October 6, 2016

Last month, the Department of Housing and Urban Development issued an order that requires any shelter receiving Federal funding in any form to allow transgender people equal access to the facility based on their "gender identity." The transgender kooks are all excited by this. And women are appalled. One of the issues that is often raised in objection to such a rige id approach is that a man might simply claim to "really" be a woman in order to get access to a women's shelter. Of course, there are a number of advantages to this. Less threats of violence. A lower population of women, so the chances of getting a bed are greatly improved. And, of course, the obvious one...being able to be among women. Of course, we are told by the transgender kooks that this would simply never happen. And of course it does.A friend, who happens to be a resident of a large homeless shelter in San Francisco, CA had told me about just such a case. (I cannot reveal this person's name, or the name of the shelter, because of privacy concerns.) There is a person residing in that shelter who presents as a "trans woman," who clearly is not. This person, who I have seen on the street near the shelter, is clearly a man, and other than wearing an ill fitting dress, makes no attempt to present as female. Some examples:

Most of the time he sports a rather full beard. While he has occasionally shaved it off, it grows back quickly, so you have someone who basically looks like a hard-core homeless man, except he is wearing a dress.

The first night she encountered him, he was in an overnight bed. During the night, she happened to observe him masturbating rather enthusiastically. She reported this to a monitor, and he was removed for the night, but was allowed to return on later nights. He now has a longer term bed, but has still be observed to engage in such behavior.

On another occasion, a woman using the bathroom noticed that the person in the stall next her was peeing rather loudly. She leaned down enough to see that person's feet, and recognized the khaki men's sneaker that this alleged "trans woman" wears. And yes, they were facing the toilet. He was standing to pee.

This illustrates the very real problem. As used in this situation, "gender identity" is meaningless. As my friend observed while we were discussing this, she has a lot of transgender friends, and they are very concerned about how they present. Even if pre-op, they sit to pee, would never engage in any activity that would make them stand out as male, and of course are far more concerned about their appearance.

No, clearly, this is just one example of a man who is doing what is claimed to never occur. He is pretending to be "transgender" in order to access a women's shelter.

Friday, August 26, 2016

In a recent article in LGBT Weekly. Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen again advocates for "access to bathrooms." And in this particular article, he exhibits an appalling lack of having a clue. He launches into one of his favorite themes...feminists sharing similar views to conservative Christians. And yet, in complaining about this, he misses a very big clue.Here we have two groups that are, for the most part, polar opposites. One would expect little common ground between them. And yes, both stridently oppose unrestricted access to women's spaces, in particular restrooms, by men who claim to be women. Now, it is an interesting fact that, for many years, pre-op transsexuals were able to easily access the women's room. The problem affects those who are more inclined to identify as "transgender." Now, I have given quite a bit of thought to term, and I have come to the conclusion that the vast, overwhelming majority of those who prefer to be labeled "transgender" tend to retain a considerable amount of identification as "male." Unlike the classic transsexual, they seem to want people to be forced to "see" them as women, while be totally aware that the person was born male. Actually being a woman, in a real, meaningful way, is outside their interests. They want to be women, but male. They want to adopt a female identify, persona, and dress, but to remain a male. Some may go so far as to have surgery, but they still insist on being "out, loud, and proud." They reject the concept of stealth, and have no desire to enter the women's room and only be seen as a woman.Now, in some cases, this is connected to the sexual arousal that many feel. Being in the women's room, or shower, or locker room, or other places that they are not really welcome, is part of the thrill.But, it never occurs to the kooks like Sandeen that perhaps the reason two groups can find common ground in this issue is that it actually is a serious issue that should not be brushed aside so quickly. That, perhaps, some common sense is called for. That honestly considering one's appearance, demeanor, and likelihood of being accepted as female, should be considered instead of just barging in, and expecting to be accepted.

Friday, May 13, 2016

My last post was back in August. To be honest, I just got tired of pointing out the never-ending insanity of the transgender kooks, and decided to spend some time on other, more productive, pursuits. I have, however, looked in from time to time and have a laugh at how absurd it is all becoming.And on one of those looks, I found out that, nine months later, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen is still obsessing over me. As is Mr. "Natalie" Reed, who, bizarrely, has apparently accused me of stabbing someone in the chest on a bus. Uh, no...I've never stabbed anyone, anywhere.As an interesting aside, Mr. Reed is also ranting about how increasing "gender neutral" bathrooms would serve to invalidate "trans people." As though the obvious obsession with forcing themselves into places they are not wanted hasn't already done that. Sort of puts the claims of just wanting to "pee in peace" in a whole new light. Nope, they want to be able to force women to put up with men, who don't even try to actually live or act like females, invading women's spaces, and to demand that these men, who cling very strongly to their male identification (while maintaining that they are "really women") be fully accepted as women.I have left my past behind. I only reveal it when absolutely required, and then with an explanation that I am a transsexual, not "transgender." And an explanation of what the difference is. Simply put, Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Reed, and all the rest of their ilk, don't want to be women. They just want to force people to say they are, all the while knowing that this does not jibe with reality.Oh well, back to doing what these kooks can never do...living my life as a woman.

Saturday, August 1, 2015

Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen has a new cause...protecting crossdressers from being labeled as men if they happen to get murdered. In yet another of his diatribes on Transadvocate, he tells us about the murder of Kenton Haggard, a 66 year-old male meth addict who had recently started crossdressing, and who was stabbed in the neck my another man who was apparently looking for a prostitute.Now, the Fresno police have a very common sense policy. They to crime victims by their physiological sex and will only note a person’s transgender status if that information will help the investigation. And in this case, they had received no information indicating that the victim was transgender. Of course, according to the transgender kooks, anytime a male crossdresses, he automatically becomes a full-fledged "female." And anyone who happens to disagree is, of course, a transphobic bigot. I guess by that standard, if, like many women, I were to put on a pair of men's jeans, and an old shirt I borrowed from my boyfriend to do something where I was going to get dirty, or otherwise stain my clothing, I would magically become a man.Ironically, Mr. Sandeen tells us that "...Fresno is the city where Joel Robles was killed, and her death is one of the reasons why we first had the Justice For Gwen Araujo Act (AB 1170) and later the End Panic Defense act (AB 2501)," but then goes on, in the same paragraph, to say "Joel Robles was crossdressed at the time, as he was most weekends." Whoops, I guess Mr. Sandeen forgot the very rule he is arguing for....But, if there is any question at all about how absurd this is all becoming, one only has to look at the statement Mr. Sandeen offers up from "Rachel" Bowman, who he describes as a transgender "woman" who helps organize the annual Fresno Pride Parade. This person, we are told, "said if a person was dressed in female attire, then that person should be called transgender or a woman, unless it’s Halloween. She said law enforcement should make the decision on the side of the person being transgender."I mean seriously, this sounds like something from The Onion. But in the crazy world of transgender kookiness, its pretty much par for the course.

Kosilek had brutally murdered his wife, and then claimed he had started transition, though there was no evidence that he had. He had previously had a court order that he immediately receive the surgery, but thankfully sanity has resulted in it being finally, and for the foreseeable future, denied.This case, among others, has been a major cause for a number of transgender extremists, who will no doubt be heartbroken that Mr. Kosilek will not be rewarded for having murdered his wife.

About Me

Copyright Notice

All original content of this blog is copyright 2017 by J.U. and all rights are reserved.

Comment Policy

Just so there is no confusion, and to make sure that certain gender fascists cannot make false claims, I want to make clear my policy concerning comments. The only rule, and it is a hard and fast one, is "NO INVASIONS OF PRIVACY!" That is, if you post information about me, such as my name, or other private information, your post will not see the light of day. After having a couple of rather nasty trolls try to get around this, I have had to do something I really dislike. Because Blogger does not allow me to block individuals, I now have to approve all comments. But, if your comment does not violate the one rule, it will be approved. So please, don't go running to someone and claim you were censored...especially someone with an established history of censoring posts to prevent actually having to defend his silliness...